• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.349-384
• /
• 2013

The Sputnik 1 launching in 1957 made the world recognize the necessity of international regulations on space development and activities in outer space. The United Nations established COPUOS the very next year, and adopted the mandate to examine legal issues concerning the peaceful uses of outer space. At the time, the military sector of the U.S.A. and the Soviet Union were in charge of the space development and they were not welcomed to discuss the prohibition of the military uses of outer space at the legal section in the COPUOS. Although both countries had common interests in securing the freedom of military uses in outer space. As the social and economic benefits derived from space activities have become more apparent, civil expenditures on space activities have continued to increase in several countries. Virtually all new spacefaring states explicitly place a priority on space-based applications to support social and economic development. Such space applications as satellite navigation and Earth imaging are core elements of almost every existing civil space program. Likewise, Moon exploration continues to be a priority for such established spacefaring states as China, Russia, India, and Japan. Recently, Companies that manufacture satellites and ground equipment have also seen significant growth. On 25 February 2012 China successfully launched the eleventh satellite for its indigenous global navigation and positioning satellite system, Beidou. Civil space activities began to grow in China when they were allocated to the China Great Wall Industry Corporation in 1986. China Aerospace Corporation was established in 1993, followed by the development of the China National Space Administration. In Japan civil space was initially coordinated by the National Space Activities Council formed in 1960. Most of the work was performed by the Institute of Space and Aeronautical Science of the University of Tokyo, the National Aerospace Laboratory, and, most importantly, the National Space Development Agency. In 2003 all this work was assumed by the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency(JAXA). Japan eases restrictions on military space development. On 20 June 2012 Japan passed the Partial Revision of the Cabinet Establishment Act, which restructured the authority to regulate Japanese space policy and budget, including the governance of the JAXA. Under this legislation, the Space Activities Commission of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology, which was responsible for the development of Japanese space program, will be abolished. Regulation of space policy and budget will be handed over to the Space Strategy Headquarter formed under the Prime Minister's Cabinet. Space Strategy will be supported by a Consultative Policy Commission as an academics and independent observers. By revoking Article 4 (Objectives of the Agency) of a law that previously governed JAXA and mandated the development of space programs for "peaceful purposes only," the new legislation demonstrates consistency with Article 2 of the 2008 Basic Space Law. In conformity with the principles laid down in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty JAXA is now free to pursue the non-aggressive military use of space. New legislation is the culmination of a decade-long process that sought ways to "leverage Japan's space development programs and technologies for security purposes, to bolster the nation's defenses in the face of increased tensions in East Asia." In this connection it would also be very important and necessary to create an Asian Space Agency(ASA) for strengthening cooperation within the Asian space community towards joint undertakings.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.119-152
• /
• 2009

Korea now has a rapidly expanding and developing space programme with exploration aspirations. The government is giving priority to the aerospace industry and, to put it on a better footing, enacted an Aerospace Industry Development Promotion Act in I987, a Space Development Promotion Act in 2005 and a Space Compensation for Damage Act in 2007. I would like to describe briefly the legislative history, main contents and comment for these three space acts including especially launch licensing, registration of space objects, use of satellite information, astronaut rescue, liability for compensation, third party liability insurance and establishment of committee and plans to assist the Korean space effort. Furthermore author proposed to legislate a new draft for the establishment of a Korean Aerospace Development Agency (KADA: tentative title) to create a similar body to Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), British National Space Centre (BNSC) of UK, French Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES), German Aerospace Center (DLR), Swedish Space Corporation (SSC), China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC), Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) as well as the Korean Space Agency (KSA: Tentative title) to create a similar body to Canadian Space Agency, European Space Agency, Russian Space Agency, Italian Space Agency, Israel Space Agency, Indian Department of Space, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) of USA, China National Space Administration in order to develope efficiently space industry. If the Korean government will be establish the Korean Space Agency as an governmental organization in future, it is necessary to revise the contents of the Government Organization Act. It is desirable and necessary for us to establish an Asian Space Agency (ASA), in order to develop our space industry and to promote research cooperation among Asian countries, based on oriental idea and creative powers.

• Current Industrial and Technological Trends in Aerospace
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.44-55
• /
• 2008

Catalyzed by the recent development of space technology, various kinds of spacecrafts were launched and utilized with purposes in many developed countries. In case of emergency such as natural disasters, proper satellite images are required in order to help to mitigate and assess the effects of disasters on human life and property. Since there are limitations for a nation to single-handedly operate a satellite and fulfill complete demands, a development need of international cooperation organization to share satellite images among the member countries has risen. In this paper, preestablished four international organizations' background, objectives, and operating system, and their principal characteristics were analyzed and compared. Especially, the paper has focused on the analysis of on-going operating procedures and its cases for International Charter, UN SPIDER's development of local supporting network to support NFP, establishment of Web-GIS by Sentinel Asia under the goal of 'Digital Asia', and the utilization of GEO that is widely applied in natural disaster fields.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.97-136
• /
• 2004

The Northeast Asian air cargo market has expanded tremendously as a result of the opening up of the Chinese market. The importance of the Asia-Pacific region in the global air transport has also increased. The exchange of human and material resources, services, and information in Northeast Asia, which is expected to increase in the near future, requires that the airlines operating within this region adopt a more liberalized approach. This paper introduced alternatives which can be applied to the Northeast Asian airlines industry so as to bring about the integration of regional air transport: First, this paper found a need for individual Northeast Asian nations to alter their policies towards the airlines industry. Second, each country should further liberalize their respective domestic air transport. Third, there is a need for freer air service agreements to be signed between the nations of Northeast Asia. Fourth, the strategic alliances between the airlines operating in Northeast Asia should be further strengthened. Fifth, this liberalization process should be carried out in an incremental manner, beginning with more competitive airports and routes, or with less-in-demand routes. Sixth, there is a need for a shuttle system to be put into place between the main airports in China, Korea, and Japan. Seventh, these three nations jointly develop aviation safety and security systems that are in accordance with international standards. Eighth, the liberalization process of the aviation industry should be undertaken in conjunction with other related fields. Ninth, organizations linking together civil aviation organization in the Asia-Pacific area should be formed, as should each government linking together. By doing so, these countries will be able to establish regular venues through which to exchange opinions on the integration and liberalization of the air cargo market so as to induce the gradual liberalization of the actual market. The liberalization of the air transport in Northeast Asia will prove to be a daunting task in the short term. However, if the Chinese airlines continue to exhibit continuous growth and Japanese airlines are able to complete their move towards a low-cost structure, this process could be completed earlier than expected. Over the last twenty five years the air transport has undergone tremendous changes. The most important factor behind these changes has been the increased liberalization of the market. As a result, rates have decreased while demand has increased. This has resulted in turning the air transport industry, which was long perceived as an industry in decline, into a high-growth industry. The only method of increasing regional exchanges in the air transport is to pursue further liberalization. The country which implements this liberalization process at the earliest date may very well emerge as a leading force within the air transport industry.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2010

The European Union(EU) has recently introduced its Directive 2008/101/EC to include aviation in the EU ETS(emissions trading system). As an amendment to Directive 2003/87/EC that regulates reduction of the green house gas(GHG) emissions in Europe in preparation for the Kyoto Protocol, 1997, it obliges both EU and non-EU airline operators to reduce the emission of the carbon dioxide(CO2) significantly in the year 2012 and thereafter from the level they made in 2004 to 2006. Emission allowances allowed free of charge for each airline operator is 97% in the first year 2012 and 95% from 2013 and thereafter from the average annual emissions during historical years 2004 to 2006. Taking into account the rapid growth of air traffic, i.e. 5% in recent years, airlines operating to EU have to reduce their emissions by about 30% in order to meet the requirements of the EU Directive, if not buy the emissions right in the emissions trading market. However, buying quantity is limited to 15% in the year 2012 subject to possible increase from the year 2013. Apart from the hard burden of the airline operators, in particular of those from non-European countries, which is not concern of this paper, the EU Directive has certain legal problems. First, while the Kyoto Protocol of universal application is binding on the Annex I countries of the Climate Change Convention, i.e. developed countries including all Member States of the European Union to reduce GHG at least by 5% in the implementation period from 2008 to 2012 over the 1990 level, non-Annex I countries which are not bound by the Kyoto Protocol see their airlines subjected to aircraft emissions reductions scheme of EU when operating to EU. This is against the provisions of the Kyoto Protocol dealing with the emissions of GHG including CO2, target of the EU Directive. While the Kyoto Protocol mandates ICAO to set up a worldwide scheme for aircraft emissions to contribute to stabilizing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, the EU ETS was drawn up outside the framework of the international Civil Aviation Organization(ICAO). Second, EU Directive 2008/101 defines 'aviation activities' as covering 'flights which depart from or arrive in the territory of a Member State to which the [EU] Treaty applies'. While the EU airlines are certainly subject to the EU regulations, obliging non-EU airlines to reduce their emissions even if the emissions are produced during the flight over the high seas and the airspace of the third countries is problematic. The point is whether the EU Directive can be legally applied to extra-territorial behavior of non-EU entities. Third, the EU Directive prescribes 2012 as the first year for implementation. However, the year 2012 is the last year of implementation of the Kyoto Protocol for Annex I countries including members of EU to reduce GHG including the emissions of CO2 coming out from domestic airlines operation. Consequently, EU airlines were already on the reduction scheme of CO2 emissions as long as their domestic operations are concerned from 2008 until the year 2012. But with the implementation of Directive 2008/101 from 2012 for all the airlines, regardless of the status of the country Annex I or not where they are registered, the EU airlines are no longer at the disadvantage compared with the airlines of non-Annex I countries. This unexpected premium for the EU airlines may result in a derogation of the Kyoto Protocol at least for the year 2012. Lastly, as a conclusion, the author shed light briefly on how the Korean aviation authorities are dealing with the EU restrictive measures.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.3-30
• /
• 2011

According to the Article 86 of the United Nations on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS) the provisions of high seas apply to all parts of the sea that are not included in the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State. Article 87 also stipulates the freedom of the high seas. International laws on the flight over the high seas are found as follows; Firstly, as far as the nationality of the aircraft is concerned, its legal status is quite different from the ship where the flags of convenience can be applied practically. There is no flags of convenience of the aircraft. Secondly, according to the Article 95 of UNCLOS warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. We can suppose that the military(or state) aircraft over the high seas have also complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. Thirdly, according to the Article 101 of UNCLOS piracy consists of any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft. We can conclude that piracy can de done by a pirate aircraft as well as a pirate ship. Fourthly, according to the Article 111 (5) of UNCLOS the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. We can conclude that the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only military aircraft, or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. Fifthly, according to the Article 110 of UNCLOS a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that: (a) the ship is engaged in piracy, (b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade, (c) the ship is engaged in an authorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109, (d) the ship is without nationality, or (e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft. Sixthly, according to the Article 1 (5)(dumping), 212(pollution from or through the atmosphere), 222(enforcement with respect to pollution from or through the atmosphere) of UNCLOS aircraft as well as ship is very much related to marine pollution. Seventhly, as far as the crime on board aircraft over the high seas is concerned 1963 Convention on the Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft(Tokyo Convention) will be applied, and as for the hijacking over the high seas 1970 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft(Hague Convention) and as for the sabotage over the high seas 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation(Montreal Convention) will be applied respectively. These three conventions recognize the flag state jurisdiction over the crimes on board aircraft over the high seas. Eightly, as far as reconnaissance by foreign aircraft in the high seas toward the coastal States is concerned it is not illegal in terms of international law because its act is done in the high seas. Ninthly as for Air Defence Identification Zone(ADIZ) there are no articles dealing with it in the 1944 Chicago Convention. The legal status of the foreign aircraft over this sea zone might be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states whether this zone is legitimate or illegal. Lastly, the Arctic Sea is the frozen ocean. So the flight over that ocean is the same over the high seas. Because of the climate change the Arctic Sea is getting melted. If the coastal states of the Arctic Sea will proclaim the Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) as the ocean is getting melted, the freedom of flight over that ocean will also be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states.